N. V. Sunil vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd

N. Nagaresh, J

The petitioner states that he is working as an Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd., at Electrical Section, Central, Ernakulam. Departmental proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner which are pending since 2016. The departmental proceedings are yet to be concluded.

The petitioner in the meanwhile wanted to visit Dubai. The petitioner submitted an application for passport, which was granted. Now, the petitioner requires NOC from the KSEB. The petitioner has also surrendered his passport before the 5th respondent as per Ext.P6.

The petitioner states that the prolonged disciplinary proceedings cannot be a reason to deny NOC to the petitioner and to scuttle the petitioner's proposal to visit Dubai.

Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel controverted all the material allegations made by the petitioner. The NOC is not being issued since disciplinary proceedings continue against the petitioner. There is nothing wrong in withholding NOC in the circumstances of the case, contended the Standing Counsel.

The DSGI represented the 5th respondent. On behalf of the 5th respondent, it is submitted that the passport stands already surrendered to the 5th respondent. If the employer gives an NOC, the request of the petitioner can be considered.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1 to 4 and the learned DSGI representing the 5th respondent.

The issue involved in this case is issuance of an NOC for enabling the petitioner to go abroad. The petitioner is employee of the KSEB. Admittedly, disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioner. Since disciplinary proceedings are pending, the employer KSEB is not issuing requisite NOC to the petitioner.

The pleadings in the writ petition would reveal that the disciplinary proceedings are pending since the year 2016. The reasons for prolonged period of disciplinary enquiry is not discernible from the pleadings in the case. I find that such prolonged disciplinary proceedings cannot be a reason to deny the right of the petitioner to travel to Dubai. In the circumstances, respondents 1 to 4 are compellable to issue NOC as sought for by the petitioner.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent-Chief Engineer to issue No Objection Certificate in Annexure-A in favour of the petitioner, forthwith. There will be a further direction to the 5th respondent to release the surrendered passport of the petitioner on production of NOC from the employer, so as to enable the petitioner to go to Dubai during the period from 15.02.2023 to 19.02.2023.